Speaking as an American who grew up in the 50's, 60's ,and college in 70's , Bowie was pretty popular and had more than 2 hits imo.

He was played regularly on fm radio and his pop songs on am.

Interesting. I don't doubt you. I have an American friend who is about 10 or 15 years older than me, and his favorite bands are groups like Genesis, Yes, the Strawbs. He said they were on the radio all the time when he was a kid; whereas I never heard Gabriel-era Genesis on the radio, or the Strawbs. Growing up shuffling back and forth between Baltimore and Florida, the only Bowie songs I heard on the radio were Fame, Changes, Young Americans and Space Oddity.

I think American radio must've become quite conservative and more American-centric as time went by?... I wonder how and why that happened...

I don't think that Kate Bush is very PROG. She's art rock. Just like Bowie, but Bowie had more experimental stuff like 'Low'. And then, what is art rock? I personally always thought that it's subgenre and even sometimes alias for prog, art rock can be used to describe something more simple, more poppish, but _still_ with prominent sophistication/prog leanings.

I don't believe that Bjork fans really think that she is prog — but
on that site she, Nine Inch Nails, Lacrimosa and many bands no-one ever
described as progressive are counted in prog categories. Whilst many others, who always were a part of art rock movement, are listed in Prog-Related section, and that simply bugging me.

I know this is old theme for discussion, but this site really demands re-categorisation

I agreed. I think to avoid that confusion, it's better to throw out proto prog section and prog related section, and make one new section with the prog albums released by no-prog artists / bands. Of course, it could never happens, but it would not be hard to do because the artists / bands in both section are already classified on the basis of one or two albums.

I agreed. I think to avoid that confusion, it's better to throw out proto prog section and prog related section, and make one new section with the prog albums released by no-prog artists / bands. Of course, it could never happens, but it would not be hard to do because the artists / bands in both section are already classified on the basis of one or two albums.

And we should do this because?

Is it because some people are not very bright?

The site rule is whole discographies - that applies to all artists listed regardless of where they are listed. Once we start being selective on specific albums arguments will follow about which albums to list and which to exclude and that is as much of a futile waste of peoples time as evaluating every band that was a little bit experimental or different. Prog Related is no longer a catch-all category, we do not add every artist suggested.

I agreed. I think to avoid that confusion, it's better to throw out proto prog section and prog related section, and make one new section with the prog albums released by no-prog artists / bands. Of course, it could never happens, but it would not be hard to do because the artists / bands in both section are already classified on the basis of one or two albums.

And we should do this because?

Is it because some people are not very bright?

(...) Prog Related is no longer a catch-all category, we do not add every artist suggested.

No, of course it is not because are some people not very bright; a smart but musicaly inexperienced newbie, 12-13 yrs old kid comes to mind; a kid who is searching for those ancient prog albums and then run into that bunch of the bands that do not belong to the genre at all - except one or two albums by them.

Also, on that way you could open a new room for more proto prog and prog related additions but with a specific prog album by no-prog artist / band and endless discussion like this will not be possible. Of couse, if discussions as such are required for any reason, then this categorization is just perfect.

No, of course it is not because are some people not very bright; a smart but musicaly inexperienced newbie, 12-13 yrs old kid comes to mind; a kid who is searching for those ancient prog albums and then run into that bunch of the bands that do not belong to the genre at all - except one or two albums by them.

That's what reviews are for. That's why Prog Related and Proto Prog albums are not listed in the Top-100 charts.

People, especially 12-13 year olds, are bright enough to see which albums are worth buying and why. They are also smart enough to appreciate that Prog Related IS NOT PROG and they should be intelligent enough to realise that when an an artist is being discussed in this lounge it is because they are already listed here and are in one of the two categories. They should be wise enough to realise we do not to discuss unlisted artists in this lounge, and clever enough to appreciate that we do not suggest or propose our favourite non-prog artists for addition in this lounge.

Svetonio wrote:

Also, on that way you could open a new room for more proto prog and prog related additions but with a specific prog album by no-prog artist / band and endless discussion like this will not be possible. Of couse, if discussions as such are required for any reason, then this categorization is just perfect.

Nope. We really don't want any more unsolicited Proto Prog or Prog Related suggestions or any more additions, this is why only Special Collaborators can suggest artists for these two categories. This is a Prog site for reviewing Prog albums, all this stuff is but a distracting diversion. This is why we don't allow people to create polls in this lounge. Why this poll was moved here is a mystery to me.

No, of course it is not because are some people not very bright; a smart but musicaly inexperienced newbie, 12-13 yrs old kid comes to mind; a kid who is searching for those ancient prog albums and then run into that bunch of the bands that do not belong to the genre at all - except one or two albums by them.

That's what reviews are for. That's why Prog Related and Proto Prog albums are not listed in the Top-100 charts.

People, especially 12-13 year olds, are bright enough to see which albums are worth buying and why. They are also smart enough to appreciate that Prog Related IS NOT PROG and they should be intelligent enough to realise that when an an artist is being discussed in this lounge it is because they are already listed here and are in one of the two categories. They should be wise enough to realise we do not to discuss unlisted artists in this lounge, and clever enough to appreciate that we do not suggest or propose our favourite non-prog artists for addition in this lounge.

Svetonio wrote:

Also, on that way you could open a new room for more proto prog and prog related additions but with a specific prog album by no-prog artist / band and endless discussion like this will not be possible. Of couse, if discussions as such are required for any reason, then this categorization is just perfect.

Nope. We really don't want any more unsolicited Proto Prog or Prog Related suggestions or any more additions, this is why only Special Collaborators can suggest artists for these two categories. This is a Prog site for reviewing Prog albums, all this stuff is but a distracting diversion. This is why we don't allow people to create polls in this lounge. Why this poll was moved here is a mystery to me.

Anyway, if you have a section for the prog albums by no-prog bands, what I virtualy suggested, you can comfortably add for example this album

Without Wilson's masterpiece, I believe that many would agree that the PA' Proto Prog story is like a book with missing very important chapter.

An album that was never finished and never released managed to influence the development of Progressive Rock prior to 1969 when Wilson's re-imagined version wasn't released until 2004 and the sessions reconstruction version (which is an approximation of what the completed album may have sounded like), wasn't released until 2011 ... wow, that really was a special album.

An album that was never finished and never released managed to influence the development of Progressive Rock prior to 1969 when Wilson's re-imagined version wasn't released until 2004 and the sessions reconstruction version (which is an approximation of what the completed album may have sounded like), wasn't released until 2011 ... wow, that really was a special album.

I don't like a cabaret music, so I prefer his greatest hits - they are much better than that, aren't they?

Fortunately, it's not about what you like.

As Dean mentioned, that you don't like "cabaret" or prefer Bowie's greatest hits is neither here nor there in the conversation. And no, I don't think Bowie's greatest hits are necessarily better than Bowie's more outlandish and experimental stuff. For instance, I'll take "Sweet Thing", "We are the Dead" or "Big Brother" over "1984" or "Rebel, Rebel" from the Diamond Dogs album, or "Time" or "Lady Grinning Soul" over "The Jean Genie" from Aladdin Sane.

It's rather amusing that we are on a purportedly progressive site and you're touting greatest hits packages.

I don't like a cabaret music, so I prefer his greatest hits - they are much better than that, aren't they?

Fortunately, it's not about what you like.

(...) It's rather amusing that we are on a purportedly progressive site and you're touting greatest hits packages.

Actually, we are on PA Proto Prog / Prog Related forum. As Dean pointed out - Prog Related IS NOT PROG. So, I did that freely to present with some YouTube samples that my claim that Mr Bowie's timeless pop hits are much better because they're stronger expression than those cabaret-like song(s) you posted above (with a question adressed on me - 'is this pop', in the spirit of this poll I supposed) from his proggy atempts what was at the time also very fashionable - nothing less fashionable and mainstreamy than this

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum